[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The GreatViews expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.

Couple of points, I was referencing those in opposition to the regime, not in support of Bush, or pro America. Regardless of how folks may feel about US support for EU3 diplomacy, the effect has been, (and one can see it today) that the US strategy has brought the world together to address the threat the IRI poses through multilateral diplomacy.
And this bodes well for the opposition, and has become the mullah's worst nightmare.

You say 95% are in opposition today, I said 70-80% , call my figure conservative then.

Under dictatorship system 95% of society do not express their believe freely therefore we don’t know the exact number until we establish Free Society.

That's a reasonable statement...nor is it clear how many are practicing Muslims.

What is also I think perfectly reasonable to state (as I did, based on the data available) is the conclusion that a large percentage of those in opposition to the mullahs are in fact Muslim and probably think of themselves as being Muslim, by birth or otherwise.

Since it is also true that out of the billion.5 Muslims on Earth, only a very small portion of them support a radical interpretation of Islam, as promoted by the Mullahs, bin Laden, and their terrorist ilk , this would also indirectly support my statement above.

The demographic I cited that more Muslims live in free societies today than in totalitarian states is also true, and was not a reference to Iranian American Muslims (and you may be correct in the percentage you cited, I just don't have the data on that one way or another) but a reference to ALL Muslims worldwide.

Now, I'd like to ask you a very direct question:

Do you agree with the following statement by INSP chairman in VOA inteview (posted above) or not?

Quote:

"... INSP is not seeking to fight any
religion contrary to some wrong believes disseminated by
the Intelligence circles of the Islamic regime. Secularism
means that the structure of the future Iranian State should
be free on any religious interference and Vis versa.

If you do agree with it, Then it follows logicly that for anyone to use this site as a personal platform to promote a "war on Islam" violates the premis and intent of the purpose of this forum, and I would venture that those who would defend such a personal agenda as a matter of "freedom of speech"....i.e. From Amir's post above

Quote:

It also involves the freedom to criticize each and every idea, belief, person, or religion which anyone wishes to criticize. It involves giving the opportunity to everyone to freely speak their mind.

Well Cyrus, The IRI CLAIMS to be a democracy, and Antar uses the same reasoning to call the holocaust a "myth" , to urge the removal of Israel from the map, or at least relocation to some other part of it.

Freedom of speech does not grant one the right to promote an agenda contrary to the premis this opposition site was founded on...and I note you have banned "separatists" who've voiced their views here in the past.

That is an observation, not a judgement...But personally I thought that was a good call on your part at the time, as those who are seeking to create division of territorial integrity in Iran are at direct odds with the values held by yourself as site admin, and the majority of the opposition.
And as well the premis and mission statement of this site as outlined in those 7 points of your's.

One of which references Secular in terms of any future Iranian government.

The reason I cite this example of administrative action is that as it states "offensive comments may be deleted" at the top of the page.

As I stated to Amir, any Muslim would find his posts on Islam offensive, not to mention the fact that his personal comments to me have been designed to be offensive in nature...

Now I considered making a couple phone calls to a few Muslim American folks I happen to know...invite them to weigh in on this, as well as providing the membership with an alternate viewpoint (and by the way, they are very much at odds with the extremists who've hijacked Islam.)

If Amir or yourself considers that to be a "threat" or "instilling fear" then you have misread my intent.

Whether they would be welcomed is another matter, as I have personally witnessed on several occasions muslims being insulted and chased off this board by some of the members.

A sign of weakness perhaps? I don't know, but I'll find and post the links to those threads if you want. I think it's more a matter of misdirected anger....and as such, on at least one occasion, the site's premis of a democratic forum was questioned as a result.

Therefore, regardless of any disclaimer that the site is not responsible for content posted by the members....it does not work that way in reality.

Should I sin by silence and not notify Amir that his words are an offensive shotgun aproach that would reflect on this site's credibility as a forum of democracy, driving off those Muslims that might visit who are in opposition to the mullahs interpretation of Islam?

Words that create division, in promoting a "war on Islam", and do they not by being such, attempt to interfere in a people's religious practice in violation of the premis of secularity as stated in the quote of the INSP chairman above?

He states this is not a "fight against any religion contrary to some wrong believes disseminated by the Intelligence circles of the Islamic regime."

Threfore, I am perfectly justified in notifying you and Amir that to allow such a personal agenda promoting a "war on Islam" as Amir is doing... to exist on this site, not only plays right into the mullahs propoganda machine against the opposition, but in fact would thereby aid and comfort the mullahs.

Secularism means that the structure of the future Iranian State should be free on any religious interference and Vis versa.

I agree with this statement.
Due to my limited time I am not interested in your "war on Islam" subject.... in the context of Free Iran the Islam has been tested and all reports indicate that the Iranian people are rejecting the concept of Islamic Regime why should we waste our time on it?
I am more interested in how to help Iranian people to remove the Islamist regime with minimum bloodshed and without major war.

Due to my limited time I am not interested in your "war on Islam" subject.... in the context of Free Iran the Islam has been tested and all reports indicate that the Iranian people are rejecting the concept of Islamic Regime why should we waste our time on it?

I am more interested in how to help Iranian people to remove the Islamist regime with minimum bloodshed and without major war.

You and me both, that's why it would be nice if folks wouldn't hand the regime ammunition to use against the opposition by promoting a "war on Islam" as Amir has done on this site.

In line with helping the people remove the regime, a correct stance is essential to side-step regime propaganda directed at the opposition...this is why I posted the VOA interview, as I believe it reflects a correct stance in response.

If Amir understands that at this point, then at least I haven't wasted my time dealing with a potential problem before it becomes a more serious one.

You are talented writer and instead of defining yourself (your view) in opposition of one our fellow activistchat member every few weeks who are not holding any political position, you might consider to write your comments in favor or against someone in US State Dept. or Senators regarding Iran who are in position of power. Freedom-loving Activists are watching those who are in power and not individuals in public without political power.
I am one of the readers of your posts from State Dept. with your highlights and comments ….

"... INSP is not seeking to fight any
religion contrary to some wrong believes disseminated by
the Intelligence circles of the Islamic regime. Secularism
means that the structure of the future Iranian State should
be free on any religious interference and Vis versa.

INSP is not seeking to fight any religion. That’s excellent, and I applaud them. To each go their own priorities. I have no problem with that.

Now let’s focus on the second sentence, which is the key. “Secularism means that the structure of the future IRANIAN STATE should be free on any religious interference and vice versa.” What reasonable person would not agree with that statement? Certainly not I, though you would like to portray that with your song and dance.

What is the portrayed meaning of this second sentence? That the STATE (or government) will not interfere with matters of religion. Plainly stated, it calls for the separation of state and church. I absolutely agree. The future Iranian state must not at all interfere with affairs of religion, and vice versa. This means that the government and its administrators must stay clear of pushing any religious agendas while using their official civil authorities.

So, if I ever became a STATE OFFICIAL OR ADMINISTRATOR in future Iran, I should probably keep my feelings about islam to myself. Since I do not plan to ever keep quiet about islam, I would never run for public office. I plan to always simply remain a faithful citizen of Iran.

So, if one who is NOT in any way a STATE OFFICIAL OR ADMINISTRATOR wishes to encourage or discourage a religious agenda, is that really interfering with secularism, or separation of church and state? Is it really?

Because if I am guilty of violating secularism here, then so is anyone and everyone in any and every nation who has ever uttered a word in relation to any religion. According to your edict, every rabbi, priest, akhound, mullah, mobad, or monk who has ever stated his religious beliefs must be silenced. So I ask, is that really secularism and separation of church and state, or is that religious persecution, Mr Oppenheimer?

I am just a citizen who is speaking his mind. I never asked for the future government of Iran to promote anything I say. I am not the president of a nation, calling for the promotion or abolition of any religion.

By your asking for the suppression of my “religious views” from this site, you are calling for the suppression of ANY and ALL posts here that pertain to religious discussion. You are saying that anyone who posts here discussing religion is undermining secularism. Are you really saying that, Mr Oppenheimer? Because if so, please delete a couple dozen of your own posts first.

As usual, my reply just took the wind out of your argument. You are grasping at straws, Mr Oppenheimer. So what else you got…..anything?

Quote:

Freedom of speech does not grant one the right to promote an agenda contrary to the premis this opposition site was founded on...and I note you have banned "separatists" who've voiced their views here in the past.

I don’t know anything about the people that Cyrus banned in the past. Whoever they were, I’m sure Cyrus had his reasons. This is his site, and he can let in or kick out whomever he chooses. To be a member here is a privilege, not a right. It is not everyone’s “inalienable right” to be an activistchat member.

When I spoke of my freedom of speech, I spoke in the general sense of stating my opinions to the world, in any forum, whether in cyberspace or real space. I was not merely referring to my voice in just this specific site.

Now, if Cyrus ever decides that I am hindering the opposition, it is his right to ban me from here. Since I am obviously continuing to post here, apparently administration is not in agreement with you, Mr Oppenheimer. But until the day I get banned (which I think will come no sooner than the mahdi’s reappearance), I’ll continue to post here. I like it here…..I think I’ll stick around….he…he…he….

What continues to entertain me, Mr Oppenheimer, is that when someone challenges you to a religious debate you are more than eager to roll up your sleeves and jump in. But when you fail to do well in your debate, you get frustrated and run to administration. “Unfair”…..you cry. “Where is the secularism?”……you cry. “What happened to separation of church and state?”…..you cry. “Stop the religious discussions”…..you cry.

Keep crying sir. I can only laugh.

I almost feel guilty that I’m getting this top quality entertainment for free.

Quote:

Now I considered making a couple phone calls to a few Muslim American folks I happen to know...invite them to weigh in on this, as well as providing the membership with an alternate viewpoint (and by the way, they are very much at odds with the extremists who've hijacked Islam.)

If Amir or yourself considers that to be a "threat" or "instilling fear" then you have misread my intent.

No, Mr Oppenehimer, I do not perceive such phone calls to be a threat. In fact, I welcome them. If you feel a bit overwhelmed, and wish to call in your backup or big brother, please do so. I sincerely hope that your backup will prove to be a bigger challenge than you have been.

I welcome a debate on islam by anyone you wish to call in. Be it a muslim American, imam, imman, seyed, sheikh, mullah, ayatollah, Mohammad, or Allah. In fact, feel free to call in your “ideological soul mate,” mullah Khatami as well. Remind him to approach me first with his “dialogue of civilizations,” and to quickly counter with the rebuttal “islamo-phobe.” But don’t forget to bring your pom poms , so you can shake them each time he yells “islamo-phobe.”

However, before you make your “phone calls,” you may want to consider the following. By calling in your Moslem buddies and asking them to “weigh in on this….issue of islam…..” are you not promoting a religious agenda on this forum? According to your reasoning, are you not thereby violating the premise of secularism on this site?

I sure don’t think so. But interestingly, it seems that you think so…._________________I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Dear Amir and Oppenheimer,
Please consider not to put more energy on this subject at this time due to danger of nuclear war... We can always come back to it ....
With unity how can we help to avoid Iran 'destruction' ..... ?
What kind of message should we have for public?